Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Upper_Krust" data-source="post: 394979" data-attributes="member: 326">Hi Celebrim mate! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Probably, I was just rambling out loud. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Absolutely. But I think you are going to have problems utilising cross-sections to determine an overall hit point total though. Hence my adoption of the square root of the mass.   Let's assume that they are no more heavily built than average sauropods of that length (since they have the same genaral body plan), so a body weight of about 50 tons.  Note that at 100,000 lb., my colossal dragon is only half the weight of your gargantuan one.Well, looking at various dragon illustrations they do seem stockier than similar length sauropods. Not to mention wings; and thicker scaling.Incidently my gargantuan dragon was 48ft. (rather than a 32ft. 'entry level' example). However, according to the Monster Manual (pg.5)Gargantuan Creature 32,000lbs-250,000lbsColossal Creature 250,000+lbs  Of course a 50 ton dragon won't be as heavily built as a 50 ton human. However a 64ft. dragon will be heavier built than a 64ft. humanoid.Remember size doesn't incorporate the tail for dragons.  I would argue that they shouldn't though.Okay.  True. Though I was factoring that heavier (and by association stronger) creatures could wear thicker armour.You mean the gargantuan dragon right? The colossal dragon could have armour up to DR 75 (64ft. dragon)...under those rules.  Provided velocity was a constant.Generally the velocity of shells is reduced the larger they are.  Yes, but as I mentioned before the cross section idea doesn't translate well to RPG mechanics.  Actually it doubles every 5 points in 3rd Ed. if we go by lifting capacity.   Actually a Colossal Dragon should have about STR 5120  (x512 normal human strength) using the cross-sectional method. If we apply this to the current (flawed) strength table then it works out at STR 55.Actually if we assume a constant velocity (though there would be some reduction) then the energy (base damage) is going to be proportional to the mass (not the strength).This represents a x8 dice multiplier/x8 mass increase. That means you are looking at a 100,000lb dragon dealing x250 base medium size damage.To sum up:Realistically.- Base Damage x8/Mass x8 (given constant velocity)- Strength x4/Mass x8- Armour x2/Mass x8 (given relative thickness of same material)A tricky shot on a moving dragon though. Someone could always get lucky though! Of course dragons also have Blindsight... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I do like the idea of grounding it though, by attacking the wings. If the rules were logical you could probably write an entire book on how to best fight dragons and such-like.</blockquote>

Verification